I bet you will be sorely disappointed in my waterblock testing then because there will be:
No computer running in a case
No multiple radiators
No different tubing/fitting sizes
No hottest running CPUs (I need a ceramic base AMD with Palomino core to validate my diode numbers and the best I can muster is ~ 75W)
I remain unconvinced that there is any real purpose other than busy work to the majority of these studies that you want to see, Powerhouse. If you vary the flow rate (and thus the pressure capabilities of your pump) then you simulate the effects of different pumps and different rad and fitting combinations as they relate to waterblock performance (water velocity vs. pressure drop is all that matters). There is no need for anything else. The radiator is for now a necessary evil (I have no recirculating water bath) so I will use the biggest best heatercore I can find.
You have spent several thousand on equipment: 2 motherboards and high speed processors, a case, all these radiators, fittings, tubing, pumps, waterblocks, etc, and then you will learn what? Using typical overclocker temperature monitoring gear you would need a temperature difference of more than 4.5C to be valid when rating performance (2 thermistors with 3C accuracy so the error propagation goes like (3^2+3^2)^1/2 or square root of 18 for relative error in measurement). It would take several months to do the testing that you want to see, and in the end you would get a skewed vision of the true performance of the blocks because you have inextricably tied them into the pump and radiator and overall system.
What you are proposing is fine if you want to test complete kits available on the web, but it will do nothing to improve the overall knowledge level of the reader or the advance the quality of waterblock design. Idle hands are the devil's work, however.
|